5 Guys That Have to be Good: Josh Jones

5 guys that have to be good is a series that I've been running for a number of years.  It focuses on five Packers players that need to have good seasons for Green Bay to return to Super Bowl glory.  You won't see Aaron Rodgers or even Jordy Nelson on this list.  It's not a list of obvious guys that make a ton of money that have to play well for the team to succeed.  These are "X" Factors, like Desmond Bishop and Bryan Bulaga in 2010 that could mean another run at the Super Bowl.

Stay tuned to PackersTalk.com and of course CHTV the next few Fridays and Mondays for the rest of this series.

What a strange phenomenon Ted Thompson is.  I mean that very sincerely.  NC State safety Josh Jones was ranked 11th at safety by this site's draft guide.  He was not inside Mike Mayock's top 5 at the safety position.  Jones was not really even a consideration for most Packers fans.  Green Bay already has HaHa Clinton-Dix, Morgan Burnett and Kentrell Brice in the fold.  The pick was largely panned.

Then, almost instantly, and obviously before even a preseason snap, the narrative switched.  Jones has all of a sudden become the selection of the draft class.  A deeper dive into the tape after the draft showed a lot of aggressiveness, a trait that casual fans love.  That's not to condescend to people that like Jones, I'm just trying to explain the immediate shift in the perception.

The other reason that people got excited about Jones is the position that the Packers have set aside for him to play.  Jones is going to be another strong safety/linebacker hybrid.  It's the same position Morgan Burnett plays currently.  It also signals a concerted effort by the Packers to stay ahead of the curve with what they're doing schematically on defense.  He can run alongside Jake Ryan or Joe Thomas while Burnett plays safety.  Jones can play cover 2 with HaHa Clinton-Dix while Burnett mans up with a tight end.  He can blitz (oh would I be excited to see him blitz).  

Then I started to think about Jones, and how I may have misplaced my evaluation of him as a player and the need the Packers might have for a player of his skill set.  Jones has the capability to have a huge effect on this season, and certainly in upcoming seasons.

If Jones is a hit, he allows the Packers to stray away from offering Morgan Burnett a third contract.  Drafting for a need the year before a need arises is just good business.  This is a 2018 conversation though, so we'll table it.

Green Bay has always struggled to stay healthy, especially on defense.  Jones is now key depth at the "chase" inside linebacker position and the strong safety position.  His ability to pitch in at both spots (assuming he's up to that challenge playbook-wise) will be huge.  He's as athletically talented as anyone Green Bay has brought in under Thompson.  

More importantly, though, than a Burnett replacement or even the depth he provides is the actual upside that Jones possesses as a player.  He allows Green Bay to deploy different five, six and seven defensive back packages.  His physicality, strength and speed allows them to do it without sacrificing toughness (or run defense for that manner).

Jones is the early training camp darling.  His ability to hit and his demeanor has caught the interest of the fans, and interest of Packers' defensive leaders like Mike Daniels.  It doesn't take a lot more to impress me than to have a guy like Daniels vouch for a young player.  

If you can simplify what you ask Jones to do early on, he has the athletic ability to do a lot of things.  The Jones selection reminds me a lot of the Nick Collins selection.  Collins was not necessarily a free safety prospect in the same way that Jones isn't a traditional inside linebacker.  Collins was not an expected selection, either.  Nick Collins is certainly a high bar for Jones to clear, but it's a happy coincidence.  Jones will have to contribute early on, as Collins did, if the Packers are going to succeed this season and he's going to have to do it at a number of positions.  Josh Jones has to be good.

-------------------

Ross Uglem is a staff writer for Cheesehead TV. He can be found on Twitter @RossUglem 

NFL Categories: 
0 points
 

Comments (9)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
LayingTheLawe's picture

July 31, 2017 at 07:19 pm

From all repots Jones is just itching to hit someone and play physical. But playing close to the line and having to get past offensive lineman may be a new experience for him. Let us hope he plays as well in game situations.

It is interesting that the draft pick that made everyone say what the <expletive deleted> is now the one people are most excited about. Inside linebacker is a position changing in the NFL and maybe Jones will fit into the needs of someone who can play the run but also cover slot receivers and tight ends.

0 points
0
0
flackcatcher's picture

July 31, 2017 at 08:18 pm

5 DBs on the field is the norm, for the NFL in base formation defense across the league, While Atlanta showcased the 2 big DB ILB look, Capers was doing it 2 years earlier. As usual, injuries wiped that version of the big okie out. Now Capers finally has the numbers and depth to run his version of the big DB/ILB package. Outside of 10, 14, 15 Capers has never had a healthy defense to work with. If(and that is always the question) this defense stays healthy, this team this year could really something special.

0 points
0
0
Packer_Fan's picture

July 31, 2017 at 07:54 pm

As free agency ended and how the draft went, I thought King was the key draft pick to perform well early and into the season. But it looks like Jones has big play ability and learning fast. It would help if one or two of the draft picks play well. Need that.

0 points
0
0
Branden Burke's picture

July 31, 2017 at 09:25 pm

It would be really nice to get a great hybrid safety/linebacker type that can fit a moving role like Charles woodson did in his prime. Randall has the ability. But Jones could be a star if he figures it out. Those guys make defenses great.

0 points
0
0
Turophile's picture

August 01, 2017 at 04:08 am

Ross, you have the weirdest idea of the guys on the team who 'have to be good'.

You have Burnett, who has more experience doing what the Packers want Josh Jones to do - they liked Burnett at S/ILB, which is why they took Jones (probably Burnett's successor, but not this year). The 'true' ILB candidates (Ryan, Martinez) are also far from chopped liver, as well.

Brice is another guy who is making a big second year jump as (reported by MM), and you have the vet Clinton-Dix at safety as well. Taken as a whole, the Packers would manage just fine this year, without the rookie Jones. I'm not saying I don't like Jones, I do, just that he is not a top five choice on MY list, nowhere near, at least not this year.

A much more important candidate would be Kevin King, who looks like he is being counted on to be the starting outside corner alongside House. Both of those guys are more key players this year, than J.Jones.

If I picked five guys in this have-to-be-good category, the top two choices would be Matthews and Cobb, because of the size of their contracts relative to their play last year.

Someone needs to do at least a decent job setting the edge opposite Perry - I'm hoping Matthews can be at least average there (it's not one of his strengths, as he gets older)..... and who would you have faith in doing that behind him on the depth chart, Biegel is a rookie and injured, and Fackrell is lightweight for that job.

You could make a very good case for Perry needing to be good (you could substitute 'healthy' for 'good') as he is the one guy who we know can set a mean edge AND provide some pass rush.

Aaron Rodgers is the no.1 choice in who has to be good, but he tends to play at such a high level I just expect good things from him every year - He qualifies more as "is good" rather than needs to be good, just like Nelson, Daniels, Bakhtiari or Clinton-Dix. Key candidates for my need to be good list, would be between:

Cobb
Matthews
Fackrell (GB needs a credible third pass rusher at OLB after Perry and Matthews)
Perry (who is the edge-setter with him out ?)
Montgomery (all other RBs are rookies)
Jahri Evans (at guard replacing Lang)
King (lots to learn for a rookie slated to be a starter)
House (returns to GB to start opposite King)

Pick any five from those eight. It is interesting that three of my choices are OLBs, that shows the uncertainty at that position right now, though as Biegel gets healthy and improves, and hopefully as Fackrell gets better as well, that position group should solidify over time. The choice of both new starters at corner also speaks of the uncertainty there.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

August 01, 2017 at 05:35 am

I certainly hope the coaches aren't influenced by the AAV of a player's contract. As a fan, I don't care about a player's AAV, just their performance on the field. To use two close to absurd examples, I don't think Bakh needs to be good due to his contract if Spriggs (admittedly by some miracle) beats him out cleanly on the field. Ditto for Hundley and AR for that matter.

To make the article interesting, I think it is fair to eliminate from consideration players who are making big money, since they are getting that $ due to their track record of being good in the first place. My list of players who need to be good is close to yours otherwise:

Fackrell: agree we desperately need a 3rd rotational OLBer;
King: Need 2 or better 3 boundary CBs;
House: Ibid;
Evans: I guess he needs to still be pretty good;
Monty: I'm not impressed by the rookies;

Honorable Mentions:

Clark: if not him, then Lowry, for some DL "juice";
J Jones: Can be a transformative, dynamic player;
Amichia: anyone other than Barclay as backup OC.

As a note, I don't think Amichia is ready for the NFL. Ringo destroyed him in day 4 of TC in a drill. But it would be nice. CM3 and Perry just need to be healthy, particularly during the playoffs. The 2016 version of Cobb would suffice, but it would be nice if he returns to form.

0 points
0
0
Spock's picture

August 01, 2017 at 09:24 am

Turophile, go back and read the disclaimer rules for the "five guys" criteria. Specifically, this: " You won't see Aaron Rodgers or even Jordy Nelson on this list. It's not a list of obvious guys that make a ton of money that have to play well for the team to succeed. These are "X" Factors, like Desmond Bishop and Bryan Bulaga in 2010 that could mean another run at the Super Bowl." THAT'S why your list is a bit odd for this article. Not trying to slam you, just pointing out that you missed that in your premise for the comment section. :)

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

August 01, 2017 at 04:17 am

"Then I started to think about Jones, and how I may have misplaced my evaluation of him as a player and the need the Packers might have for a player of his skill set."

Bravo, Ross. I bow to your honesty and willingness to admit mistake...

As TT said few drafts ago that Packers are trying to pick "football players", not just specialists, I am always amazed how people overlook this statement and are surprised with TT choices. Even Randall and Rollins, Montgomery, Hyde, Lowry, Clarck, M. Adams, Rip etc are players that may play several positions, so they are "football players" not CB, SS or FS, WR, RB, FB, OT, G NT, DL DE, OLB, ILB. They are mostly "football players"...

Maybe it is more obvious for me that football is changing every year and that change produced huge diferences in 10 year span, because I'm not stoned by old, more traditional football (I'm not saying that that is bad, just that is fact). That huge change was recognized from Packers Personnel department long time ago. We can see it today, by knowing what kind of players Packers were picking in each and every draft. And that change, by my humble opinion, requests more "football players" rather than specialists.

0 points
0
0
JohnnyLogan's picture

August 01, 2017 at 02:55 pm

I remind everyone, ad nauseum, that Capers is still our DC. The top five that we need to be good together don't mean a thing if Capers continues to be Capers. He's a bum.

0 points
0
0